The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment in Sudesh Chhikara v. Ramti Devi, reported in

W.P.(MD)No.33275 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 20.11.2025CORAM:THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHAW.P.(MD).No.33275 of 2025Kandasamy... Petitioner(s) Vs1. The District Collector, Karur District, Karur 2. The District Registrar, District Registrar Office, Karur, Karur District.3. The Revenue Divisional office, Revenue Divisional Office, Karur, Karur District.4. The Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar Office, Mela Karur, Karur District.5. Seenivasan ... Respondents1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.33275 of 2025 Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Moo.Mu.10318/2025 (E4) dated 02.09.2025 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to cancel the Settlement Deeds executed in favour of the 5th respondent in Doc. No.7180/2022 dated 16.07.2022 within the time frame stipulated by this Honble Court as well as to provide protection to the petitioners life with Rule 23(1) of Tamilnadu Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules 2007 and pass such other or further orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case and thus render justice.For Petitioner: Mr.S.MuniyandiFor R1 to R4: Mr.D.Sasi Kumar Additional Government PleaderORDERThe above writ petition has been filed for the following relief:-“Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Moo.Mu.10318/2025 (E4) dated 02.09.2025 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to cancel the Settlement Deeds executed in favour of the 5th respondent in Doc. No.7180/2022 dated 16.07.2022 within the time frame stipulated by this Honble Court as well as to provide protection to the petitioners life with Rule 23(1) of Tamilnadu Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules 2007 and pass such other or further orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case and thus render justice”2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.33275 of 2025 2. Mr.D.Sasikumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4. 3. By consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. Since no adverse orders are to be passed against the 5th respondent, notice to the 5th respondent is dispense with. 4. The facts as set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition are as follows:-The petitioner would submit that he is a senior citizen who is aged about 79 years and has been living with his daughter namely Santhi at Kerala. He would submit that he owned the lands in S.Nos.2/8, 214/1, 214/6, 232/A3, 232/B4, 233/D3, 234/D2, 259/4, 259/7, 259/9, 688/2, 688/4, 689/2, 689/4, 234/A2, 235/2, 232/A1, 681, 259/3 and 247/2A situated at Athoor Village, Manmangalam Taluk, Mela Karur Sub Registration Officer, Karur District. These properties were his ancestral property and he has been in possession and enjoyment of the same. The 5th respondent is none other than his own son. 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.33275 of 2025 5. It is the case of the petitioner that on the false assurance that the 5th respondent would take care of the petitioner and also the petitioner's daughter namely Shanthi, the petitoner had executed a settlement deed dated 16.07.2022 in favour of the 5th respondent which was registered as Doc.No.7180 of 2022 on the file of the 4th respondent. However, contrary to the assurance, after the execution of the settlement deed, the 5th respondent neither cared cared for the petitioner nor given any maintenance. Further, the 5th respondent had driven the petitioner out of his home and he is now residing with his daughter at Kerala. Therefore, the petitioner had filed a petition under the Tamil Nadu Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2007, seeking to quash the settlement deed executed in favour of the 5th respondent before the 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent without following due process of law and without addressing the petitioner's grievance had dismissed the said petition. 6. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner had filed an appeal to the 1st respondent, who by the impugned order has dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the 3rd respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.33275 of 2025 7. The only ground on which the order is sought to be challenged is that the Settlement Deed had been executed only upon the inducement of the 5th respondent that he would take care of the petitioner. Further, he is now residing at Kerala only on account of the fact that he had been sent out of of his house.8. Heard the learned counsel on either side. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment in Sudesh Chhikara vs Ramti Devi, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1684 has held that the reservation of a condition for providing basic amenities and basic physical needs in the transfer documents is a sine quo non for applicability of the provisions of Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. 10. A perusal of the Settlement Deed clearly shows that here is no pre-condition imposed upon the settlee to take care of the petitioner herein. The Settlement Deed dated 16.07.2022 executed by the petitioner in favour of the 5th respondent is extracted below:- 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.33275 of 2025 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.33275 of 2025 11. A reading of the above settlement deed would clearly substantiate the fact that the Settlement Deed has not been executed in lieu of the settlee taking care of the petitioner till the end-of-life. Therefore, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 20.11.2025NCC :yes/NoIndex :yes/NoInternet:yes/Norgm7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.33275 of 2025 P.T.ASHA, J.rgmTo1. The District Collector, Karur District, Karur 2. The District Registrar, District Registrar Office, Karur, Karur District.3. The Revenue Divisional office, Revenue Divisional Office, Karur, Karur District.4. The Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar Office, Mela Karur, Karur District.W.P.(MD).No.33275 of 202520.11.20258/8